[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2112?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12584460#action_12584460
]
Vamsavardhana Reddy commented on TUSCANY-2112:
----------------------------------------------
Another related JIRA from OASIS.
http://www.osoa.org/jira/browse/JAVA-14 "Conversation Attributes are not in
Java Schema"
Description: The conversation attributes defined by @Conversation Attributes in
the initial working draft of the Java Common Annotations and APIs Specification
do not exist in the initial working draft of the Assembly Model Specification.
While this may not be a problem it is an inconsistency in so far as the other
annotations all impact SCDL. It should also be noted that Java typically sets
the pattern for other language bindings.
> Add conversational intents as described in the assembly spec
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: TUSCANY-2112
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TUSCANY-2112
> Project: Tuscany
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Java SCA Core Runtime
> Affects Versions: Java-SCA-1.1
> Environment: All
> Reporter: Simon Laws
> Assignee: Vamsavardhana Reddy
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: Java-SCA-Next
>
>
> I've been looking at the parts for the assembly spec that deal with
> conversational semantics and there are a couple of gaps when
> compared with the current TUscany implementation. In particular Tuscany only
> supports annotations in Java interfaces when declaring
> conversational behaviour.
> Section 1.5.3 describes the use of policy intents for specifying
> conversational behaviour
> 819 interface type. Note that it is also possible for a service or a
> reference to set the conversational
> 820 intent when using an interface which is not marked with the
> conversational intent. This can be
> 821 useful when reusing an existing interface definition that does not
> contain SCA information.
> I assume this meansa service could have a "conversational" intent
> <component name="ConversationalServiceStateless">
> <implementation.java
> class="org.apache.tuscany.sca.itest.conversational.impl.ConversationalServiceStatelessImpl"/>
> <service name="ConversationalService" requires="Conversational">
> <interface.java
> interface="org.apache.tuscany.sca.itest.conversational.ConversationalService"
>
> callbackInterface="org.apache.tuscany.sca.itest.conversational.ConversationalCallback"
> />
> <binding.ws/>
> <callback>
> <binding.ws/>
> </callback>
> </service>
> </component>
> as could a reference
> <component name="ConversationalStatelessClientStatefulService">
> <implementation.java
> class="org.apache.tuscany.sca.itest.conversational.impl.ConversationalClientStatelessImpl"/>
> <reference name="conversationalReferenceClient"
> target="ConversationalReferenceClient"/>
> <reference name="conversationalService" requires="Conversational"
> target="ConversationalServiceStateful">
> <interface.java
> interface="org.apache.tuscany.sca.itest.conversational.ConversationalService"
>
> callbackInterface="org.apache.tuscany.sca.itest.conversational.ConversationalCallback"
> />
> <binding.ws/>
> <callback>
> <binding.ws/>
> </callback>
> </reference>
> <reference name="conversationalService2"
> target="ConversationalServiceStateful">
> <binding.ws/>
> </reference>
> </component>
> It's not clear from the spec if there should be an EndsConversation intent
> for operations.
> These intents would drive the existing underlying conversational
> functionality by augmenting the interface model will appropriate
> conversation information.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
